- My play was blunder-free, which was the result of consistently following the simplified thought process.
- Despite the over 400-point ratings gap, I rejected ratings fear and loathing and simply played to the best of my ability. My opponent, on the other hand, appeared to be playing my rating and not the board, as he passed up multiple drawing lines from inferior positions.
- Similarly, I was able to have the mental toughness necessary not to offer a draw in a better position simply because of the ratings differential, which was a strong temptation at various points.
- I was able to spot key tactics on different occasions by keeping in mind the importance of CCT (checks, captures, threats) regardless of whether they appeared possible at first glance.
The game was an interesting one right from the start, as my opponent went into the aggressive Bellon Gambit against the English. I had seen a mention of it previously, but the extent of my knowledge was limited to the fact that declining it with 5. d3 was the best option. (This is one of those rare cases where declining a gambit is the only path to an advantage, rather than accepting it.) For those interested in the theory - which I did not follow during the game - there are a series of excellent articles on ChessCafe.com that I found afterwards.
It struck me as obvious from the start that my opponent was rather contemptuous of my rating, although he was polite enough personally. The choice of such an aggressive and not fully sound gambit line is consistent with that assessment, as he was clearly seeking to create an imbalanced game and exploit anything I did to stumble along the way. He did not seem to expect me to decline the gambit, as he had to do some thinking after that occurred. Nevertheless, he got most of what he wanted out of the opening, which is designed to give Black an advantage in the center by allowing him to occupy d5 with a pawn.
Despite some uncomfortable moments, I managed to equalize and by move 18 had a clear strategic target in my opponent's hanging pawns structure. Some relatively weak play by my opponent, apparently again motivated by a desire to avoid drawing lines, allowed me to establish a bind in the center and eventually find a tactical shot that won the key c-pawn. Subsequent play gave me the initiative and a positional advantage, but nothing decisive until I found another, more devastating tactical follow-up. After that it still was not easy, as my opponent fought hard and sacrificed additional material to threaten a mate in one - which he never was able to execute, as my calculated attack came first.
While my play was hardly perfect, having missed some opportunities along the way, it was sufficient to the task. I was especially heartened by my ability to find the necessary tactical opportunities and correctly calculate them, along with my ability to cope with the pressure of an intense 50+ move game. I would not have been able to play this game without the benefits of the training program and the insights offered by my studies, since beginning this blog.